1. The Field of the Invention
The present invention generally relates to resolving conflicts for programs scheduled to record with coinciding broadcast schedules. More particularly, the present invention provides for determining a conflict time span, which indicates the duration of the conflict between programs. Further, the present invention uses this conflict time span for determining available recording options for resolving the conflict and displays these options in a user interface. Other exemplary embodiments provide for ensuring that a user will be able to cycle through each of the available options regardless of the priority for the scheduled programs.
2. Background and Related Art
For years, home entertainment systems have allowed viewers to record television programs for later viewing. The earliest systems for recording television programs in a viewer's home were video cassette recorders (VCRs), which record audio/video signals on a magnetic tape recording medium or video cassette. In the early history of VCRs, the viewer tuned to the desired channel, waited for the program to start, and activated the VCR in order to record programs. Although this innovation allowed user to time shift programs, the user still had to be at home to activate the VCR. Accordingly, VCRs were soon equipped with programmable systems, which in response to user input, automatically initiated the recording process to record a program even when the VCR was unattended. Such programmable capabilities enabled viewers to record programs during sleeping hours, while the viewers were away from home, or at other times when it was not convenient to manually activate the recording process.
During recent years, other recording media in addition to magnetic tapes have become available. For instance, it is now common for television programs to be recorded on hard disks in set top boxes associated with televisions. Although different media are now available, the basic concept of recording television programs for later viewing has not significantly changed.
Another recent development is the electronic program guide (EPG), which graphically displays television program's listings on television screens. Although there are various EPGs being used today, typical EPGs display programs in a grid format for multiple channels and various time slots. Accordingly, the view scrolls along both horizontal and vertical axis to identify television programs being broadcast at different times and on different channels. By simply a glance at an EPG, a viewer can easily learn what program is being broadcast on a specific channel during a specific time.
While EPGs can assist the viewer in identifying when programs are being broadcast, they have also been used to streamline the process of programming recording systems. For instance, viewers can use the EPG to identify when a program is to air, and manually set the recording device accordingly. Recently, however, depending upon the user interface associated with the set top box that includes the EPG, a viewer can use specific features on the UI of the set top box to program the recording system. For example, the viewer may simply select a box or region corresponding to a program within the EPG in order to schedule the program for recording. Alternatively, the viewer may be required to go to a different user interface page or display to cause the recording system to be programmed appropriately.
Regardless, of how a user schedules a television program for recording, viewers commonly encounter a situation in which they attempt or desire to record multiple television programs with overlapping broadcast schedules. Although multiple tuners within a set top box allow users to reduce the likelihood of conflicting programs, such tuners are expensive and are not available or upgradeable in many conventional systems. Accordingly, scheduled recordings with coinciding air times will often exceed the number of available tuners resulting in a conflict. In such instances, some form of conflict resolution will need to be preformed.
In conventional systems, the selection of multiple programs for recording with competing program schedules was prohibited. Accordingly, if the viewer were to attempt to program the recording system to record conflicting programs, the viewer would first have to manually deselect a first program and then reselect the desired program. Other systems would allow a conflicting program to be selected, but would not indicate that a conflict existed; resulting in the viewer falsely believing that the program would be recorded.
More recently, however, recording conflicts between competing programs are resolvable through an automation process within the set top box. For example, some systems use preferences for resolving recording conflicts between programs. Such preferences may be set by a user or predefined by the manufacture. For example, a user may be able to rank desired recordings of programs by, e.g., a percentage. Other systems may provide a preference that indicates repeat programs (i.e., those that are recorded periodically such as a series) are either always or never preferred over non-repeat programs. Another preference may be that programs with alternative broadcast schedules (i.e., programs broadcast at a later time) are not to be selected. Alternatively, or in conjunction, the priorities may be based on the program genera, e.g., a preference for choosing comedies over drama. Preferences defined by the manufacture may be based on when the program was selected. For instance, the system may record the program based on a first in first out basis.
Conflict resolution based upon priority settings, however, has several down falls. For instance, because preferences resolve conflicts automatically, a user does not have full control over how conflicts are to be resolved. For instance, a first in first out preference always presumes that the user prefers later chosen programs over the more recently selected ones. Clearly, however, there will be times when the user prefers the opposite resolution. Accordingly, if the user is unaware of the resolution a less desirable program will be recorded.
Other systems provide a user with a display for resolving program recording conflicts. For example, when a user selects a program for recording, which conflicts with a previously selected program, a display similar to the one in FIG. 1 will be generated and presented to the viewer. In such instances, a choice for resolving the conflict is made (e.g., based on preferences) and the user is given a display 100 with a lot of text 105 to describe the conflict and the chosen resolution. The user is then prompted 110 to either accept or reject the chosen resolution. Although such systems allow a user more control than preferences alone, such conflict resolutions rely heavily on difficult to read and often confusing text 105 to describe the problem. Further, these systems allow for limited solutions. Accordingly, in a multi or dual tuner environment where multiple conflicts may exist, the user may not be able to understand the full range of options. As such, the user is presented with a confusing text-heavy display of the conflict with limited options.
Accordingly, there exists a need to assist a user in resolving conflicts in an easily understandable and user friendly way. Further, because there may be multiple tuner conflicts, there exists a need to be able to cycle through all available conflict resolution options.